Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 17.djvu/422

 ERSKINE, JOHN, sixth, and first or sixth of the Erskine line (d. 1572), regent of Scotland, was the third and eldest surviving son of John, fifth lord Erskine, and Lady Margaret Campbell, daughter of Archibald, second earl of Argyll. The family traced their descent in the female line from Gratney, earl of Mar (successor of the ancient Mormaers of Mar), who married Christiana Bruce, sister of Robert I. In the male line they had as a progenitor Henry de Erskine or Areskine, who was proprietor of the barony of that name in Renfrewshire as early as the reign of Alexander II. His descendant, Sir Thomas Erskine, married Janet Keith, great-granddaughter of Gratney, earl of Mar; and Robert, son of Sir Thomas Erskine, on the death of Alexander Stewart, husband of Isabel, countess of Mar, liferent earl, claimed the title, but the claim was not recognised. The fifth Lord Erskine had a charter in 1525 constituting him captain and constable of the castle of Stirling. He was guardian of James V during his minority, and subsequently of his daughter Mary, afterwards queen of Scotland. Some time before his death in 1552 he had also been keeper of Edinburgh Castle. The sixth Lord Erskine had been educated for the church, and became prospective heir unexpectedly through the death of two brothers. After the death of his father the castle of Edinburgh came into the hands of the Duke of Chatelherault, but when in 1554 he agreed to recognise the regency of the queen dowager, the charge of it was given to the sixth Lord Erskine until the duke should demit his authority to the parliament (, History, i. 282). This having been done, the custody of the castle was committed by the parliament to Erskine, with provision that he should deliver it up to none except with the consent of the estates, the proviso being added to guard against the possibility of its falling into the hands of the French. At this time Erskine had not become a supporter of the reformed doctrines, and although he afterwards joined the reformed party, his natural temperament, as well as the position of neutrality which accidental circumstances had assigned him, prevented him from ever assuming the character of a partisan. Along with Lord Lorne, afterwards fifth earl of Argyll, and Lord James Stuart, afterwards earl of Moray, he attended the preaching of Knox at Calder in 1556 (, Works, i. 249), and he also signed the joint letter of these two lords and the Earl of Glencairn inviting Knox in 1557 to return from Geneva (, i. 319). At the beginning of the dispute with the queen regent in 1559 he, however, intervened on her behalf to prevent the surrender of Perth (, Works, i. 358), which nevertheless took place on 26 June, and subsequently he appeared on her behalf at the conference at Preston (ib. 369). In all this it is evident that his chief motive was to prevent the miseries of civil war. For himself he recognised that he was bound to maintain a strict neutrality. He therefore permitted the French troops of the queen to enter the city, a proceeding which so much discouraged the lords of the congregation that on 24 July they signed a truce. Knox wrote on 23 Aug. to Crofts that the queen dowager ‘has corrupted (as is suspected) Lord Erskine, captain of the castle, and hopes to receive it’ (State Papers, For. Ser. 1558–9, entry 1234), but the suspicion proved entirely groundless. On 19 Sept. the lords sent him a letter warning him against permitting the queen regent to fortify Leith (, i. 425–7), but he paid no heed to the communication. At last he told them plainly that he could promise them no friendship, but must needs declare himself friend to those that were able to support and defend him (, i. 553), whereupon on 5 Nov. they resolved to evacuate the city and retire to Stirling. At the same time he seems to have given them to understand that his sympathies were entirely with them in the struggle with the queen regent (Sadler to Cecil, 8 Nov. 1559, Cal. State Papers, For. Ser. 1559–60, entry 211). Subsequently he declared that he would keep the castle till discharged by parliament (Sadler to Cecil, 5 Dec. 1559, ib. 383), and requested the lords to aid him if need be. At the special request of the queen regent he consented, on the approach of the English army, to receive her into the castle (, i. 582), but this was avowedly a mere act of courtesy, and also enabled him to intervene more effectually in the cause of peace, for, as Calderwood remarks, ‘he had both her and the castle at command’ (ib.)

According to Knox, Mar was the ‘chief great man that had professed Christ Jesus’ who refused to subscribe the ‘Book of Discipline’ in 1560 (Works, ii. 128). At his lack of ardour Knox professes to feel no surprise, ‘for besydis that he has a verray Jesabell to his wyffe, yf the poore, the schooles, the ministerie of the kirk had thair awin, his keching wold lack two parttis and more of that whiche he injustlie now possesses’ (ib.) The lady to whom this unflattering epithet was applied by Knox was Annabella Murray, daughter of Sir William Murray of Tullibardine, and of Catherine, daughter of Sir Duncan Campbell of Glenurchy. She had the reputation of being avaricious (